Traffic management

Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • East Sussex County Council (19 001 647)

    Statement Not upheld Traffic management 14-Oct-2019

    Summary: Mr C complains about the County Council's submissions to the Local Planning Authority as highways consultee for a proposed residential development. Mr C considers the LPA would not have approved the planning application if the Council had provided the correct information and the development will exacerbate the existing parking problems in his road. The Ombudsman has found no fault by the Council.

  • London Borough of Hounslow (18 017 881)

    Statement Not upheld Traffic management 07-Oct-2019

    Summary: On the evidence available, there is no evidence of fault by the Council. Officers consulted residents on a traffic scheme, considered the responses and made a decision. The complainant disagrees with the scheme, as it places restrictions outside his business, but there is no evidence of fault leading up to the Councils decision.

  • London Borough of Ealing (17 020 061)

    Statement Upheld Traffic management 03-Oct-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains about how the Council introduced a controlled parking zone. The Ombudsman has not found fault with how the Council implemented the controlled parking zone but has found fault with its handling of Mr B's complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B for not making a reasonable adjustment and to provide training to its staff on their duties under the Equality Act 2010.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (18 007 118)

    Statement Upheld Traffic management 04-Sep-2019

    Summary: Mr D complains the Council has failed to introduce parking restrictions on roads near his home. The Ombudsman has found no fault in the way the Council introduced parking restrictions, but there was fault in the way it dealt with Mr D's correspondence. It has agreed to apologise and make a payment to him to acknowledge the time and trouble he has been put to.

  • Suffolk County Council (18 018 021)

    Statement Upheld Traffic management 20-Aug-2019

    Summary: Mr D complains the Council has failed to deal with his request for road traffic calming and safety measures. The Ombudsman has found evidence of delay by the Council and has upheld the complaint and completed the investigation because the Council accepts the recommended actions.

  • Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council (19 000 432)

    Statement Not upheld Traffic management 08-Aug-2019

    Summary: There was no fault in the Council's decision not to implement recommendations in a traffic report.

  • Wokingham Borough Council (18 008 200)

    Statement Upheld Traffic management 31-Jul-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains about the Council's decision on a planning application and its refusal to agree road safety measures, putting himself and others at risk. He also complains about delays in complaint handling. The Ombudsman will not investigate the Council's decision on a planning application as this arose more than 12 months ago. The Ombudsman finds no fault in the Council's decisions on road safety but finds fault in the Council's complaint handling. The Ombudsman recommends the Council makes a payment to Mr X for time and trouble.

  • London Borough of Hackney (18 014 077)

    Statement Upheld Traffic management 31-Jul-2019

    Summary: Mr X purchased a car based on the Council's decision to issue him with a parking permit. However, on renewal of the permit, the Council said the permit was issued in error and he was not eligible due to his property being located in a 'car-free development'. There is fault and the Council has agreed to grant Mr X a parking permit until the lease on the car he purchased expires.

  • Norfolk County Council (18 016 325)

    Statement Upheld Traffic management 17-Jul-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council had not properly considered her complaint about an increase in traffic, and the speed of vehicles travelling past her house following the opening of a new dual carriageway. The Council was not at fault for how it considered the increase in traffic. The Council was at fault because its speed management strategy was unclear and contains misleading information about its part in investigating speeding vehicles. The Council agreed to review its speed management strategy so it accurately reflects its role in responding to complaints about speeding vehicles.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (18 002 921)

    Statement Upheld Traffic management 28-Jun-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman found fault by the Council on Mrs Q's complaint about it failing to investigate her reports of a mosque never opening its car park for which it received planning consent which may be contributing to local parking problems. While it acted against inconsiderate parking, it failed to explore the reason for its frequent recurrence. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused. There was no evidence of her asking for a disabled bay. There is insufficient evidence about it failing to maintain pavements to find fault.